SEGUIN v. REMINGTON ARMS COMPANY (2022)

Writ application denied.

I disagree with the decision to deny certification. As I recently stated in Goodrich v. United States, 21-CQ-0988 (La. 11/17/21), 327 So. 3d 492, certification promotes comity between the state and federal courts, permitting the highest court of the state to develop principles of state substantive law. See generally Frymire Home Servs., Inc. v. Ohio Sec. Ins. Co., 12 F.4th 467 (5th Cir. 2021). In my view, this Court should have granted certification in this case in order to promote the “cooperative judicial federalism” that the certification procedure contemplates. See Lehman Bros. v. Schein, 416 U.S. 386, 390, 94 S.Ct. 1741, 40 L.Ed.2d 215 (1974).

Hughes, J., would grant and answer the certified question. Crichton, J., would accept certification and answer the certified question and assigns reasons. McCallum, J., would grant and answer the certified question.